A friend on Facebook posed a question to me that he had received from a pro-choice person. The question was, "if the unborn feel pain, should we, then, outlaw circumcision?"
Now, it's not my desire here to get into the circumcision debate. I actually don't have a firm view on it one way or the other. What I do want to comment on quickly is the inability of many people to understand what is good for a person, and/or to think critically about their arguments and reject them if they are bad. This one is a really bad argument.
I understand the person who posted this likely doesn't consider abortion to be bad. But he/she should have at least been able to understand that since my friend is pro-life, he would consider abortion to be bad. Which means that there is a difference between abortion and circumcision -- one that is meant to kill the child, and one that is meant for the child's own good. Whether or not the infant feels pain or can consent to it, since circumcision is meant for the child's good, the doctor and parent has a moral right to make that decision on behalf of the child. There might be an argument that circumcision really does not do the child good. I don't know enough about the debate to make this determination. But if circumcision does have good benefits for the child, then it is certainly moral to circumcise a child.
So there is a huge difference between a procedure meant to kill a child, abortion, and one meant for the child's own good, circumcision. The inability of many people to be able to distinguish between good and bad (or moral and immoral) is but a sad commentary on the state of our society.
A blog dedicated to defending human life, from fertilization to natural death, at an intellectual level.
Like what you read?
Official Comments Policy:
This is my blog and I reserve the right to delete any comments that don't abide by these rules and/or don't contribute to the overall intellectual atmosphere of the blog. I don't mind comments from people who disagree with me, as I am very much open to reconsidering or revising anything that I write.
1. No swearing or otherwise profane language.
2. No insults or otherwise abusive language, toward me or any other commenter.
3. No spamming or trolling.
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Saturday, March 28, 2015
An Abortion Book for the Kiddos
You may have heard by now that there's a children's book written by Mary Walling Blackburn called Sister Apple, Sister Pig. It's a children's book about abortion. A book about a very adult topic written to children that you wouldn't yet talk about the event that preceded the abortion (the birds and the bees, and all that). You can find the book for free at the link provided, though at free the book is still highly overpriced.
Read the rest at the Life Training Institute blog.
Read the rest at the Life Training Institute blog.
Monday, February 10, 2014
The Hard Case of Rape, Revisited
I have written before on the rape exception, and I would like to do so again to take another crack at convincing my pro-life colleagues who hold to a rape exception that we should not allow legal abortions in the case of rape. Please see my previous article for more of my thoughts on the rape exception. I will not be re-hashing any of those thoughts in this article.
Wednesday, June 26, 2013
A Shameful Display by Pro-Abortion Advocates
If you’re not aware, there was a very shameful display by pro-abortion advocates in Texas yesterday. Legislators were meeting to vote on SB5, which was pro-life legislation aimed at, essentially, forcing abortion clinics to clean up their act. This shameful display only showed how far pro-abortion advocates are willing to go to bully others, even lawmakers. No one would stand for it if it were pro-life advocates acting like this, but it’s okay because they were on the side of abortion. It's worth pointing out that I rarely ever get political, and I certainly don't talk about politics much on this blog. But this really ground my gears, so I need to get this out.
Monday, June 17, 2013
Bad Pro-Choice Arguments: Is Masturbation Mass Murder
As a conservative Christian, this is a topic that used to embarrass me. Five years ago I never would have even considered writing an article on this topic, but ever since becoming a pro-life advocate, it was a topic that I’ve had to become comfortable with. Mostly because this is an argument that just doesn’t seem to go away.
Monday, June 10, 2013
A Critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion, Part V
Sunday, June 2, 2013
A Critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion, Part IV
For part one of this series, go here. For part two, this is the place to be. And for part three, mosey on over this way.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
How Pro-Choice People Tend to Corrupt the Abortion Debate
The abortion debate certainly has a tendency to become emotional. There are many logical arguments used to argue for and against abortion, but these can be largely ignored in favor of appeals to emotion (such as trying to argue that pro-life people are trying to take away an important “choice” for women to make). Now, I’m certainly willing to talk to my own side and illustrate ways in which pro-life people make bad arguments in the hopes that they’ll make better ones (I credit my friend and pro-life mentor Josh Brahm for helping me see the value in treating both sides fairly, as well as my friend and pro-life philosopher, Steve Wagner, through my work with Justice for All).
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Friday, April 19, 2013
Empathy in the Abortion Issue
I’m taking a bit of a break from my critical series on Thomson’s famous essay, A Defense of Abortion, to present an article that was inspired from a conversation I had with my friend, Linda, on Facebook. I am a speaker and mentor for Justice for All, which is an organization that trains people to make the pro-life case persuasively and effectively (by making good arguments and avoiding bad ones while avoiding the common pitfalls the people tend to fall into while discussing controversial topics, such as yelling and name-calling, and have good, respectful dialogue). So I have a vested interest in helping pro-life people make good arguments and avoid bad ones, including helping them see the other side as people and not as any manner of unkind thing they may think about pro-choice people. This article will be a bit of a departure from my normal output, as this will be a bit more personal.
Friday, March 29, 2013
A Critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion, Part II
For part one of this series, click here.
Section 1. The “extreme” pro-life view. [1]
I agree with Thomson that the view that abortion is impermissible even to save the mother’s life is an extreme pro-life view. I believe that abortions are justified if the mother’s life is in immediate jeopardy. [2] She does wonder how we are supposed to weigh the mother’s life against the unborn child’s when the mother’s life is at stake, but at that point her right to self-defense should be asserted.
Monday, March 11, 2013
A Critique of Judith Jarvis Thomson's A Defense of Abortion, Part I
Probably the most famous argument against the pro-life position is Judith Jarvis Thomson’s Violinist Analogy, in which you are attached, against your will, to a famous unconscious violinist to prevent his dying from a kidney ailment. I have already responded to the violinist analogy in previous articles, but contained in the original essay this argument appeared, A Defense of Abortion, there are other arguments contained therein to argue against the pro-life position. I would like to take a look at the entirety of her essay and show why it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. I’ll look at it in sections, divided up as she divided her original essay.
Monday, February 4, 2013
Arguments Against Fetal Personhood
In my previous article on Personhood, I explained that what makes us “persons” (if you must use the term) is our inherent nature as rational, moral agents. While I tend not to focus on personhood arguments unless the topic is broached by the other person, I can only see one reason for disqualifying the preborn from personhood: in order to justify killing them. Any definition for personhood given by a pro-choice advocate works equally well to disqualify some born people from that same status (most notably, infants). But most pro-choice people would not follow their definitions to the logical conclusion and support infanticide.
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Personhood USA
So my recent article I wrote for the Secular Pro-Life blog on fetal personhood was picked up by Personhood USA and linked to on their blog.
Monday, January 7, 2013
On Personhood
It’s an uncontroversial fact of science that the preborn conceived of a human male and human female are human beings (biologically) from fertilization. But does this mean that just because they’re human beings we can’t kill them? There are times when it’s almost universally accepted that it’s acceptable to kill a human being, such as in self-defense. But what if they are innocent of any wrong-doing deserving of being killed? Science can show us that something is human (e.g. you, me, infants, the preborn, etc.), but it can’t show us whether it’s wrong to kill humans. That’s where philosophy steps in.
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
An Answer to Some Questions for Pro-Lifers
I’m writing this in response to an article written by Atheist blogger Adam Lee, called Questions for Pro-Lifers. Please read his article before reading this one, or it may not make much sense.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Does the Bible Justify Abortion?
To be clear, abortion is not a religious issue. I have written several posts against abortion using science and philosophy. But you’ll occasionally find someone who uses the Bible to justify abortion. You’ll even encounter Atheists who try to use the Bible to justify abortion if they know a Christian is arguing against it. You just want to stare back and them and ask, “why are you using the Bible to justify abortion?! You don’t believe in the Bible!” Those wacky Atheists.
Friday, October 12, 2012
What is RU486?
This is an article that I wrote for the Life Network Australia website. You can see the article here.
Most people who are familiar with the abortion issue are familiar with surgical methods of abortion (such as D&E). But what you might not be as familiar with is RU486, which is essentially an abortion in a convenient pill. RU486 is also known by its more generic name, Mifepristone. RU486 can be effective on its own, but it is usually followed up with a second drug, Prostaglandin, to induce the uterus to contract and expel the shriveled corpse.
Most people who are familiar with the abortion issue are familiar with surgical methods of abortion (such as D&E). But what you might not be as familiar with is RU486, which is essentially an abortion in a convenient pill. RU486 is also known by its more generic name, Mifepristone. RU486 can be effective on its own, but it is usually followed up with a second drug, Prostaglandin, to induce the uterus to contract and expel the shriveled corpse.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Is Abortion Permissible in the Hard Cases? Part III
One of the most tragic things in life is when a woman or a child dies during pregnancy or childbirth. Thankfully, technology has advanced to the point where the death rate from a pregnancy-related complication is extremely low. Less than 1% of pregnant women die from a pregnancy-related complication or in childbirth. [1]
Saturday, September 29, 2012
Is Abortion Permissible in the Hard Cases? Part II
As I have previously shown, abortions because of fetal disability or deformity cannot be morally justified. But now we’ll look at another hard case, the cases of rape and incest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)